D&D 5E Are the AP's basically just a repeat of the previous complaints about FR? Why we need more short term adventures.

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[ExploderWizard]

What kind of scenario though? Most small scenarios that I see only progress if the players interact with them. The town with the wolf problem never solves it - they just sit frozen until the players stumble across it.

Exactly! The entire point to a scenario is that it is unresolved. The interaction with the scenario (AKA actual play) isn't something that CAN be pre-written, at least if that interaction is to have any meaning. If the players do not engage in a particular scenario then it simply plays out in their absence.

A scenario can be a part of a larger, living story though. A story can be happening whether or not the players choose to interact with it. If they don't, it resolves one way. If they do, their actions turn it from a mere story into a shared story.

The relentless pace of the story can give urgency to everything that the players do. "We could take a long rest here, but NPCXYZ is surely using his time more effectively..."

A story is a finished adventure. It has a beginning, a middle, and an end. If the story is a result of what happened in the fictional world then it is more accurately described as a historical record. There is no story during an adventure. It is simply life for the PCs in the moment. A shared story happens when the PCs boast of their victories back at the inn.

Urgency is ultimately up to the players. Since a story involves a finished adventure, there can't really be any urgency with regard to story. There can be plenty of undesired consequences for the PCs if they waste too much time during some adventures, it is impossible to ruin the story since the story is simply the end result of the adventure.

Most assuredly.

Though, the game doesn't have to be quite that tightly scripted, and individual encounters can have notes that give guidance on how to adjust based on current party strength (strong is long rested, weaker if pushing, etc). The players need to believe that the world is moving whether they do or not. Sometimes (many times), it actually does - especially when they are faced with the proverbial fork in the road. Other times, maybe not as much.

The game runs fine if the world actually does move no matter what. Sometimes the story ends with the heroes as corpses.

 

[Mistwell]

I would like to see WOTC publish the short adventures from AL about a month or two after the AL release.

 

[Bradley Hindman]

This is why I think short term adventures should be available to everyone because the Realms is huge and things that take place in small and obscure places don't really affect the overall Realms as a whole but can affect things in specific regions.

I am honestly confused by the complaint that Wizards isn't producing short adventures. While I can't comment on Out of the Abyss (because I haven't read it), I can say with confidence that both Tyranny of Dragons and Princes of Apocalypse are easily dissected and the individual pieces used as a set of short unconnected scenarios. Sure, work will be needed to integrate each scenario into my campaign, but that would be true even if the adventure was published as a stand-alone product. What am I missing?

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Mistwell]

Honestly? Sure. I mean, I just looked at the prior thread. It was pretty funny. A lot of people complaining about the post. Some people defending it. A few people making substantive comments. About par for the course.

I don't know why he's doing it. Maybe he feels wronged? Maybe he needs to vent? Maybe he really thinks he's looking for answers, or maybe it's because misery likes company and he likes seeing other people vent? Who knows? But it's certainly no less pointless than, say, the disintegrate vs. druid thread (not the original question, but ... oh, the last 400 comments or so), or the infinite warlords threads we had for a while.* But whatever is driving him, it will eventually go away. Or the mods will make the threads go away if they are that terrible. But if the problem is that a poster won't engage with you- then don't engage with them. He has very strong opinions, that are (arguably) incorrect, and won't listen to people. Sounds like the internet to me!

My rule of thumb is that if a poster is really bugging me, I just ignore them (as in, use the "ignore" feature). Makes my life much better.


*Not a judgment one way or the other on the topic, but there sure were a lot of threads that covered similar ground. Repeatedly.

Fair enough.

 

[Corpsetaker]

Honestly? Sure. I mean, I just looked at the prior thread. It was pretty funny. A lot of people complaining about the post. Some people defending it. A few people making substantive comments. About par for the course.

I don't know why he's doing it. Maybe he feels wronged? Maybe he needs to vent? Maybe he really thinks he's looking for answers, or maybe it's because misery likes company and he likes seeing other people vent? Who knows? But it's certainly no less pointless than, say, the disintegrate vs. druid thread (not the original question, but ... oh, the last 400 comments or so), or the infinite warlords threads we had for a while.* But whatever is driving him, it will eventually go away. Or the mods will make the threads go away if they are that terrible. But if the problem is that a poster won't engage with you- then don't engage with them. He has very strong opinions, that are (arguably) incorrect, and won't listen to people. Sounds like the internet to me!

My rule of thumb is that if a poster is really bugging me, I just ignore them (as in, use the "ignore" feature). Makes my life much better.


*Not a judgment one way or the other on the topic, but there sure were a lot of threads that covered similar ground. Repeatedly.

Let me just go ahead and say that I don't know what Mistwell writes unless it pops up in another person's reply because I have him on ignore.

This is also a discussion board, not a "Let's only praise Wizards board" which means all types of threads will pop up. The one rule that fits all here is if you don't agree with the topic then post an argument as to why or just don't engage in the thread. If you don't like hearing the topic come up then don't respond. These aren't "your" boards, they belong to all of us.

I am a very opinionated person and when something I like doesn't go the way I like it then I make it known. Also, when I have information that lead me to strong suspicions then I am going to post it. I'm not down with this Corporate D&D and I can spot spin a mile away so I'm not going to sit back and keep my mouth shut.

 

[Doc_Klueless]

I'm not down with this Corporate D&D and I can spot spin a mile away so I'm not going to sit back and keep my mouth shut.

D&D has been published by a corporation since 1975.

 

[Morrus]

These aren't "your" boards

I beg to differ.

 

[Shasarak]

This is why I think short term adventures should be available to everyone because the Realms is huge and things that take place in small and obscure places don't really affect the overall Realms as a whole but can affect things in specific regions.

According to Chris Perkins, that is what the Adventurers League adventures are for.

You just need to, you know, find a way to get them.